Anarchism is a very broad umbrella term for a group of political philosophies that are based on the idea that we can live as anarchists. We anarchists want a world without nations, governments, capitalism, racism, sexism, homophobia… without any of the numerous, intersecting systems of domination the world bears the weight of today. There is no single perfect expression of anarchism, because anarchism is a network of ideas instead of a single dogmatic philosophy. And we quite prefer it that way.
Instead, the set of documents selected for reproduction results from decision rules based on a theory of politics. The crucial point occurs when, either before or after creating a political society, a people reach a shared psychological state wherein they recognize themselves as engaged in a common enterprise and bound together by values, interests, and goals.
It is this sharing, this basis for their being a people rather than an aggregate of individuals, that constitutes the beginning point for political analysis. Essentially what they share are symbols and myths that provide meaning to their existence as a people and link them to some transcendent order.
The shared meaning and shared link to some transcendent order allow them to act as a people, to answer such basic political questions as How do we decide what to do? By what standards do we judge our actions? Through what procedures do we reach collective decisions? What qualities or characteristics do we strive to encourage among ourselves?
What qualities or characteristics do we seek or require of those who lead us? Far from being the Edition: These myths and symbols become at the same time both Corporations individual profit wthout individual responsibility essay basis for action as a people and the means of their self-illumination as a people.
Frequently expressed in political documents, the core political symbols tend to structure the documents and determine their content. Put another way, by studying the political documents of a people we can watch the gradual unfolding, elaboration, and alteration of the embryonic symbols that define a given people.
Using only a few of these early documents of foundation, Kendall and Carey identified a number of basic symbols present in all of them as well as in documents of the s and s: The important points made by Kendall and Carey are that there are basic symbols, in embryonic form, found in the earliest documents of foundation written by colonial Americans and that these symbols are found in American political documents written years later, after the colonial era, but now in a differentiated form.
While provocative and convincing, the position taken by Kendall and Carey cannot be considered firmly established until the early American documents of foundation can be comprehensively analyzed and the symbols traced through succeeding documents.
Later research by others does indeed show the continuity in symbols running from the Mayflower Compact to the American state and national constitutions of the late eighteenth century and that the embryonic basis for this political tradition clearly evolves from basic symbols in the Judeo-Christian Edition: The first decision rule was to include only those documents written during the colonial era.
Post documents are readily available in a number of good collections, but there has been no good collection of pre foundational documents. The one exception to this rule in the present collection is The Articles of Confederation, which has been included because it is the direct culmination of colonial constitutional evolution.
The state constitutions should also be included but are easily available in any library and are too long for inclusion, whereas the Articles of Confederation is brief and makes the transition from colonial to postindependence documents of political foundation dramatically apparent.
Juxtaposing the Articles of Confederation with its immediate predecessors is therefore useful for illustrating the connection between pre- and postindependence documents. The second decision rule was to include only documents written and adopted by the colonists, which excludes those written in Britain.
Some may see this rule as tending to minimize the impact of the Mother Country on the process of constitutional development in America. The purpose of the rule, however, is to produce a coherent book of manageable length and not to imply the absence of English common law influences.
The extent to which there was appropriation of English common law and foundational ideas by the colonists will be apparent in the documents written on this side of the Atlantic. The third decision rule was to include documents that were in fact foundational.
Political systems are not founded by judicial decisions or executive Edition: Too often constitutionalism is viewed merely legalistically, whereas legalism is the result of constitutionalism and not the other way around. Foundational documents by definition create institutions and decision processes that did not exist before; or else they establish fundamental laws that give direction to what legislatures, executives, and courts later do, although these fundamental laws do not determine the actual form or content of later political decisions.
Finally, a document was included only if it had been publicly adopted by the entire relevant community through the consent-giving process in use by that community. This decision rule thus excluded political essays and tracts no matter how important or influential they might have been at the time. Often adoption resulted from legislative action whereby the legislature was conscious of acting in a foundational capacity.
Usually these legislative actions amounted to amending the existing constitutional order at a time when a formal amendment process that directly involved the people had not yet been invented. Even with these decision rules to narrow the eligible documents, some further exclusions were necessary.
Some documents were too long and largely redundant in their content. So, for example, Connecticut had multiple codes of law adopted during the s, but they largely reiterated the first law with minor variations, and including them served no real purpose other than to lengthen the book.
The result is a collection of foundation documents from the colonial era that provides the basic information needed by any reader to understand the process of differentiation described by Voegelin.Corporations: Individual Profit Wthout Individual Responsibility Words | 6 Pages.
being owned by a single entity. Ultimately, these rights are seen as necessary and without these rights a Corporation could not exist in society; and as an extension this is why the majority of people see the need for these businesses to possess individual rights.
Life Without Law. An Introduction to Anarchist Politics. Web PDF Print PDF Audio. we create organizing structures that allow for the full autonomy of every individual, wherein no person can be compelled to go along with the wishes of the group. Rather than plead and beg for the government or corporations to start protecting forests, we.
Corporations: Individual Profit Wthout Individual Responsibility - Corporations, presently, are legal citizens in the United States. This legal citizenship guarantees all Corporations many of the legal rights that natural born citizens can enjoy with limited consequences for their actions.
Capital budgeting is a step by step process that businesses use to determine the merits of an investment project. The decision of whether to accept or deny an investment project as part of a.
A World Without Work. on the individual level, and the hollowing-out of community pride. or Depression-era “makework,” it might do the most to preserve virtues such as responsibility. Our Individual Social Responsibility Essay - Individual Social Responsibility is a moral belief where we as individuals, have a responsibility toward society.
Being "socially responsible" is about all individuals behaving ethically and sensitively towards social, economic, and environmental issues.